Energy Efficiency of Desktop and Laptop Computers

Mat Doiron Office of Science, FaST Program Big Bend Community College Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley, California August, 15 2007

Prepared in partial fulfillment of the Office of Science, Department of Energys Faculty and Student Team under the direction of Charles Verboom in the Information Technology Division at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.

Participant: Signature

Research Advisor: Signature

Table of Contents

Abstract. iii Introduction .. 1 Materials and Methods . 3 Results ...... 4 Discussion and Conclusions ......... 6 Upgrading Old Systems ... 6 Dell Desktops ....6 XP vs. Vista ...... 6 Dell Laptops . 7 Acknowledgments .... 7 References .... 7 Tables ...............................................10 Figures .... .13

ii

Abstract As the number of computers in use worldwide increases, so does the demand for electricity to power them. This research focused on measuring computers typically used at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in order to determine their power consumption. This included the Optiplex 745 series from Dell, ClientPro series from MPC and a custom made computer designed to run Computer-Aided Design (CAD) software. Three Dell Latitude Laptops( D600, D610, D630) were included. Measurements were taken during five different states; off, booting, idle, active and sleep, with a Kill-A-Watt meter. Two Operating systems, Microsoft Windows XP Professional and Windows Vista Business were also compared to determine their impact on power use. PassMark Performance Test V 6.1, a benchmarking program, was used to evaluate the performance of the computers. It was also used to simulate the computer in an active state. It was discovered that the computer uses less energy while sitting idle than while active and significantly less while in sleep mode. Putting the computer to sleep during non-working hours would be ideal but several factors currently prevent this from taking place, including scheduled backups and remote access. New desktop computers being implemented at the lab use less energy than those currently in use despite their superior performance. The new computers are the Dell Optiplex 745 series, which were tested in three different configurations: Minitower, Small Form Factor and Ultra Small Form Factor. The three were compared to see if size or component differences affected power consumption and performance. There was very little difference between the Minitower and Small Form Factor. In contrast, the Ultra Small Form Factor used less power with reduced performance. This could be because of the external power brick and lack of dedicated graphics card. The laptops in this study consumed significantly less power than did the desktops: 22W while idle compared to 68W. This is significant because it includes the monitor. An LCD monitor uses 30W and a CRT up to 130W, which is more than the entire laptop. Windows Vista and Windows XP were also compared using identical computers. Vista performed worse and consumed more power despite the fact that it is the successor to XP. It is recommended that customers wait for the first service pack to switch to Vista if performance or power management is a major concern.

iii

Introduction There are currently over 600 million computer users worldwide. That number is expected to reach 1 billion by 2010 [1]. One of the main concerns with this influx of computers is the power that they will inevitably require. Every computer added to the power grid puts strain on current power plants eventually leading to the construction of new plants that will add unwanted pollution to the atmosphere. An average computer uses between 65-120 Watts (W) when active, 0-10W in low power mode and 0-5W when off. The predicted billion computers would use 65 billion watts or 65,000 megawatts per day. Leaving computers on at night is a widely accepted practice in the office environment. This is done for a variety of reasons including late night automatic updates, virus scans, accessing files from home or not wanting to wait for the computer to reboot in the morning. In actuality, turning a computer off at night or sending it into a standby mode when not in use could potentially save a significant amount of money. Running a computer continually for a year can cost $70-100 on average. When considering a business with a thousand computers the energy cost is $70,000 - $100,000. To address the problem, Microsofts operating systems (OS) Windows XP and Windows Vista were designed with built in features that include sending the computer into a standby mode or sleep, and shutting the monitor off. These features usually are disabled by the user or are poorly implemented. There is also a major flaw which allows programs to override standby mode in XP, leaving the computer to sit idle for hours on end. In any case, the power conservation abilities of XP only extend to turning off the monitor and hard disks after a user defined time of inactivity. When Microsoft designed Vista, the new operating system, they
1

included power saving features designed to significantly reduce the energy consumption of the PC. The Workstation Support group at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab tested these features to see how well they perform and what the best options are to save the most energy while still maintaining the required performance. On July 20, 2007 The Department of Energy (DOE) put into effect new ENERGY STAR standards. The new standards define computers in three categories. Category B must have a multi-core processor or more than one discrete processor and a minimum 1GB of RAM. Category C must have a multi-core CPU, a graphics card (GPU) with 128MB of non-shared memory and one of the following, 2GB of RAM, 2 hard drives or a TV tuner. Any computer that does not meet the requirements for categories B or C is defined as Category A. There are 2 categories for notebooks, A and B. The only requirement for Category B is a video card with 128MB of dedicated, non-shared memory. Category A is any notebook that does not fall under Category B (2). Another Criteria for each category is the maximum watts allowed for the standby, sleep and idle states. It is 2 W for standby (off) and 4 W for sleep on all three categories. The idle state is the only difference in each category. The requirements are as follows, Category A 50 W, Category B 65 W, Category C 95 W [2]. (Table 1) In order to meet the new standards, companies such as Dell have started releasing new computers designed specifically to reduce energy costs. The new series from Dell is called the Optiplex and comes in four different sizes: Minitower, Desktop, Small Form Factor and Ultra Small Form Factor. They are significantly smaller than the typical tower. The group tested these new models against their predecessors to see if switching to newer (and smaller) computers would make a difference in the power consumption of the lab. Measurements were taken on a
2

variety of models including newer and older systems along with different hardware configurations to determine what causes higher or lower power consumption. The goal of the research was to determine if switching to newer computers can reduce the high cost of powering the current systems while still providing the performance requirements of Berkeley Lab. Materials and Methods The study included a range of desktop models from two companies, Dell and MPC. The Optiplex 745 series from Dell includes three different models: the Mini Tower, Small Form Factor and Ultra Small Form Factor. The ClientPro series from MPC consists of a ClientPro 365 and a ClientPro 385. The study also included a custom machine from Finetech designed to run Mechanical CAD programs and three models from Dells Latitude laptop series: the Latitude D600, Latitude D610 and Latitude D630. See Table 2 for detailed specification on all desktop models and Table 3 for laptops. The computers were plugged into a device called the Kill-a-Watt, which measures watts being consumed in real time and displays the output on a screen[3]. The Kill-a-Watt was used to measure watt consumption while at 5 different stages: off, booting, idle, active and sleep/hibernate. For off, booting, idle and sleep/hibernate this was done simply by recording the data from the Kill-a-Watt while the computer was in each state. Active however required stress to be put on the machine. To do this a benchmarking program called Performance Test version 6.1 from PassMark was installed and run [4]. Performance Test includes a test for the CPU, RAM, 2D graphics, 3D graphics, hard drive and CD drive (Figure 1). All tests were run in sequence, which put the needed stress on the system and allowed for the active recordings to be

taken. Every computer was put through the same test three times and results were averaged. Performance Test also gives an overall score that is a compilation of the 6 subtests. A unit of measure was created to determine which computers utilize energy the best. The score from Performance Test was divided by the watts while active to produce the performance per watt score (PW). A higher PW score translates to a higher efficiency. For example a computer that uses 100W while active with a Performance Test score of 500 would have 5 PW. (Table 4) Two different operating systems, Windows XP (32 and 64 bit) and Windows Vista Business were used. Windows XP was installed on all computers. The Dell Optiplex 745 Mini Tower and MPC ClientPro 385 were then tested with both XP and Vista in order to compare the power management capabilities of both OSs. To get an idea of energy use in the office environment peripherals commonly found at the lab were measured. Both Liquid Crystal Displays (LCD) and Cathode Ray Tubes (CRT) were measured. The LCDs were 19 Samsung SyncMasters and the CRT was a 21 Dell Trinitron. Printers measured included two HP Color LaserJets, three HP LaserJets and an Epson Photo R300. Results Table 5 displays the Watts being used by each computer included in the study during the 5 power states. The power states are off, booting, idle and active and sleep. The numbers were obtained using the Kill-A-Watt meter.

Table 6 shows the score that each computer received from Performance Test V.6.1. The benchmark was done 3 times on each computer and averaged for the final result. Table 7 is a comparison of Microsoft Windows Vista and Windows XP. It shows power consumption during the 5 states in Watts. Two Dell Optiplex 745s, one with XP installed, one with Vista and two MPC ClientPro 385s, one with XP, one with Vista are represented in the table. The objective was to have everything the same except the operating system to determine if they differ in energy use. Typical office devices were also included in the study. Monitors (Table 8), Printers (Table 9), personal fans and space heaters along with other various office equipment, were monitored while plugged into the Kill-a-Watt and the output was recorded. Figure 1 shows a graphical representation of watt consumption during the active power state. The active state was simulated by running the Performance Test benchmark. It also displays a watt range of desktops, laptops and high performance computers represented by the differently colored sections. Figure 2 is a breakdown of PassMark Performance Test V.6.1. The computer used was the Dell Optiplex 745 Minitower. Each different color represents a different sub-test of the benchmark. Performance Test is actually a suite of tests run in sequential order. CPU, RAM, 2D Graphics, 3D Graphics, Hard Drive and CD Drive test scores are compiled to equal the final score. The test was used for the active state because it simulated actual work by using every part of the computer that would typically be used.

Discussion and Conclusions Replacing old systems Most computers currently in use at the lab are from the prior generation, meaning they have one processor, usually a Pentium 4, and less than 1GB of RAM. The release of Windows Vista is increasing the need to replace these old systems. Vista requires at least 1GB of RAM to run optimally. The new generation of computers are dual core (two processors on one chip) with 2GB of RAM. One question was whether the new dual core systems with more RAM, powerful video cards and faster hard drives have a higher energy demand than the older systems. To answer the question the older MPC ClientPro 365 series was measured with the Kill-A-Watt and compared to the new MPC ClientPro 385 and Dell Optiplex series. The idle was comparable on all models at 66-68W. The difference became apparent during the active, off and sleep states. When active the older ClientPro 365 used an average of 101W while the newer Dells and ClientPro 385 used 71-88. The newer machines are also more efficient while off and sleeping. They used half the energy the 365 does while asleep and 1-2W while off, compared to 5W. After the comparison it became apparent that the new generation computers use fewer watts even though they are more powerful than the last generation. Dell Desktops The Optiplex 745 series from Dell includes four models, Minitower (MT), Desktop, Small Form Factor(SFF) and Ultra Small Form Factor(USFF). Three of the four models were

available for the study and evaluated to determine if the difference in form factor translates to a difference in power consumption. The MT and SFF have identical parts. The only difference is size. The USFF doesnt include the video card the other two have. It has integrated graphics instead (see Table 1). The MT and SFF use 1W when off and the USFF uses 3W. This might be due to the large external power brick that used by the USFF. As the computer gets smaller the watts also go down for both the idle and active states(Table 3). All three use 3W while in sleep mode. For performance the MT and SFF got exactly the same score of 662.6 while the USFF got a 608.2. The USFF received a lower score because it lacks a dedicated graphics card. The USFF is the ideal choice if there is a major energy concern, with a power per watt of 8.6. The MT (7.5 PW) and SFF (8.1 PW) however do not use much more energy and in return perform significantly better. XP vs. Vista The Dell Optiplex MT and MPC ClientPro 385 were tested with both Vista and XP installed as the operating system. Both operating systems used the same number of Watts for all categories except for active. Vista used 6 more Watts on the Dell and 7 more on the MPC than XP. In terms of performance scores, the Dell with Vista received a 619.5 while the XP version received a 662.6, a difference of 43 points. The MPC with Vista scored at 651.7, the XP version a 699.6, a difference of 48 points. Vista used more Watts while active and received a lower test score than XP. This is probably because Vista is still in the early stages. Hopefully with the release of the first service pack Microsoft will improve the energy efficiency and performance. At this time however XP is still a superior performing OS. (Table 6)

Dell Laptops The series of laptops tested was the Latitude from Dell. The D600, D610 and D630 (Table 2 for specs) were all put through the same tests as the desktops. The batteries were removed while testing because charging would skew the results. Zero watts were used by all three while off and 0-1 while in sleep. All three were again comparable in the idle and active categories; they used 18-22 idle and 30-36 active. This is around 50W less than the desktops in both idle and active. In exchange for less energy being used, performance is sacrificed. The D600 and D610 scored 277.9 and 226.8 respectfully. This is less than half the score of the desktops. The D630, which is the most recent model, scored a 561, only 48 points lower than the average score of all desktops. When it comes to efficiency the laptops are far more efficient than desktops. The D630 scored a 15.6 PW, the highest of any computer in the study. The D600 (8.7 PW) and 610 (7.6 PW) are old models and are still just as efficient or in some cases more efficient than the desktops. An important factor to consider is that the laptop energy use includes the monitor while the desktop results do not. A stand alone LCD (Liquid Crystal Display) uses around 30 watts, which is more than the entire laptop. For simple tasks such as word processing and email the laptop might be an ideal solution. However as laptops become more powerful and less expensive it could be possible to replace desktops with laptops. Or perhaps the methods used to make the D630 so efficient could be implemented into desktops. Peripherals CRT monitors are an archaic technology. LCDs have become the industry standard for monitors because of their efficiency and small size. Simply replacing all old monitors with LCDs will save energy (Table 8). Having an individual printer in each workspace is not only bad for energy efficiency, it increases the cost of printing with unnecessary hardware. Sharing one large
8

printer is the preferred solution. Acknowledgments This research took place at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab. I would like to thank The Department of Energy and the FaST program for providing me this great opportunity and experience. I would also like to thank my mentor Charles Verboom and professor Zach Tanko. Dan Pulsifer, Craig Nelson and Jay Kraus also helped. References (1) A billion PC users on the way Michael Kanellos Staff Writer, CNET News.com (August 2, 2004) http://news.com.com/A+billion+PC+users+on+the+way/2100-1003_3-5290988.html (2) Key Product Criteria for ENERGY STAR Qualified Computers ENERGY STAR (2007) http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=computers.pr_crit_computers (3) Kill-a-Watt official website http://www.p3international.com/products/special/P4400/P4400-CE.html (4) PassMark Performance Test version 6.1 official website http://www.passmark.com/products/pt.htm

Tables Table 1 - Energy Star Criteria

Desktops Category A Category B Category C Notebooks/Tablets Category A Category B

Off 2.0 W 2.0 W 2.0 W 1.0 W 1.0 W

Idle 50.0 W 65.0 W 95.0 W 14.0 W 22.0 W

Sleep 4.0 W 4.0 W 4.0 W 1.7 W 1.7 W

Table 2 - Desktop Computers Included in the Study

Dell Optiplex 745 Mini Tower
CPU RAM Hard Drive Video Card NIC CD Drive CPU RAM Hard Drive Video Card NIC CD Drive CPU RAM Hard Drive Video Card NIC CD Drive Intel Core 2 6400 2.13 GHz 2GB 160GB SATA 3.0Gb/s 256MB ATI Radeon X1300PRO Broadcom NetXtreme 57xx 16X DVD+-RW Intel Core 2 6400 2.13GHz 2GB 160GB 7200RPM 256MB ATI Radeon X1300PRO Broadcom NetXtreme 57xx 16X DVD+-RW Intel Core 2 6400 2.13GHz 2GB 160GB 7200RPM Intel Integrated GMA950 Broadcom NetXtreme 57xx 16x DVD+-RW

MPC ClientPro 385

CPU RAM Hard Drive Video Card NIC CD Drive CPU RAM Hard Drive Video Card NIC CD Drive CPU RAM Hard Drive Video Card NIC CD Drive Intel Core 2 Duo 6600 2.4GHz 2GB 120GB 7200RPM Intel Integrated GMA 950 Gigabit TSSTcorp CDW/DVD Intel Pentium 4 2.8GHz 512MB 80GB 7200RPM NVIDIA GeForce 6200 Intel Pro/1000 LITE-ON CD-R 4X Dual Core AMD Opteron 8GB 150GB WDC WP1600JS Nvidia Quadro FX 1400 Nvidia nForce Sony DVD/RW

Dell Optiplex 745 SmallFormFactor

MPC ClientPro 365

Dell Optiplex 745 UltraSmallFormFactor

Finetech Custom CAD Workstation

10

Table 3 - Laptop Computers Used In the Study

Dell Latitude D600
CPU RAM Hard Drive Video Card NIC Wireless CD Drive CPU RAM Hard Drive Video Card NIC Wireless CD Drive Intel Pentium M 1.7GHz 512GB 80GB IC25N080ATMR04-0 ATI Mobility Radeon 9000 Broadcom NetXtreme 570x TrueMobile 1300 Mini-PCI CD-RW/DVD Combo Intel Core 2 Duo T7300 2GHz 2GB 80GB Fujitsu MHW2080BJ G2 Intel IMA X1300 Broadcom NetXtreme 57xx Dell 1390 WLAN Mini-PCI 8X DVD+-RW CPU RAM Hard Drive Video Card NIC Wireless CD Drive

Dell Latitude D610

Intel Pentium M 2.00GHz 1GB 80GB ST9808211A ATI Mobility Radeon X300 Broadcom NetXtreme 57xx Dell 1370 WLAN Mini-PCI Sony DVD+-RW

Dell Latitude D630

Table 4 Performance per Watt (PW) Performance per Watt (PW)

Optiplex 745 Minitower Optiplex 745 Small Form Factor Optiplex 745 Ultra Small Form Factor ClientPro 365 ClientPro 385 Latitude D600 Latitude D610 Latitude D630 Finetech Custom

PW
7.5 8.1 8.6 3.6 8.2 8.7 7.6 15.6 4.9

Table 5 - Watt Consumption During The 5 Power States Model

Dell Optiplex 745 Minitower Dell Optiplex 745 SmallFormFactor Dell Optiplex 745 UltraSmallFormFactor MPC ClientPro 365 MPC ClientPro 385 Dell Latitude D610 Notebook Dell Latitude D600 Notebook Dell Latitude D630 Finetech Custom

off
1 1 3 5 2 0 0 0 6

booting
79 76 64 95 77 28 30 30 189

idle
67 66 54 68 67 22 18 18 181

active
88 82 71 101 85 30 32 36 205

sleep
3 3 3 6 3 1 1 0 117 11

Table 6 - Performance Test V.6.1 Scores Model

Dell Optiplex 745 Minitower XP Dell Optiplex 745 Minitower Vista Dell Optiplex 745 SmallFormFactor Dell Optiplex 745 UltraSmallFormFactor MPC ClientPro 365 MPC ClientPro 385 XP MPC ClientPro 385 Vista Dell Latitude D600 Notebook Dell Latitude D610 Notebook Dell Latitude D630 Finetech Custom

Score
662.6 619.5 662.6 608.2 366 699.6 651.7 277.9 226.8 561.1 1001.6

Table 7 - Comparison of XP vs. Vista Model

MPC ClientPro 385 XP MPC ClientPro 385 Vista Dell Optiplex 745 Minitower XP Dell Optiplex 745 Minitower Vista

off
2 2 1 2

booting
77 92 77 79

idle
67 68 66 67

active
85 92 82 88

sleep
3 3 1 3

Table 8 - Monitors Model

Samsung SyncMaster 940T (DVI) Samsung SyncMaster 915N (VGA) Dell Trinitron 21" CRT

Black
30 29 83

White
31 28 128

Table 9 - Printers Model

HP Color LaserJet 4700DN HP Color LaserJet 4650DN HP LaserJet 8100DN HP LaserJet 4100N HP 2100TN Epson Photo R300

Idle
35 29 33 21 12 6

Printing
723 723 1300 876 335 11

12

Figures Figure 1 - Breakdown of Watt Consumption While Benchmarking with Performance Test V.6.1

Figure 2

13